Football Outsider win predictions

I've got no problem with a prediction of 8-8. However I can easily see 10 wins with an improved passing game and a defense that could be special.

I've got no problem with a prediction of 8-8. However I can easily see 10 wins with an improved passing game and a defense that could be special.

I agree. The passing game can't possibly be any worse. 10 wins is absolutely conceivable. I'm excited to see what the D can do this year.

Receivers are only as good as their QB. See Roddy White, Wes Welker, DeSean Jackson, the entire Saints receiving corps and all those scrubs Tom Brady made look good (Deion Branch, Troy Brown, etc.) before Moss and Welker got there.

Just felt like pushing buttons this morning;)

I agree, Moss has gamebreaking ability -see Dallas and Saints game- and Cooley is a great weapon at TE. so we shouldnt be struggling the way we are,someone else has to step up with those guys getting all of the attention. 13 pts a game over the 2nd half is terrible. and the oline had the same avg of sacks allowed per game over the 2nd half of the season if you dont count the Steeler game-7 sacks. in which they did play bad but it also skews the stats as a whole.

I agree, Moss has gamebreaking ability -see Dallas and Saints game- and Cooley is a great weapon at TE. so we shouldnt be struggling the way we are,someone else has to step up with those guys getting all of the attention. 13 pts a game over the 2nd half is terrible. and the oline had the same avg of sacks allowed per game over the 2nd half of the season if you dont count the Steeler game-7 sacks. in which they did play bad but it also skews the stats as a whole.

Yeah, and there's no reason they shouldn't have done better against the niners when absolutely nothing was on the line. I can understand needing an above average to dominant O line to be successful against the best defenses in the league, but there are no excuses against the likes of the Bengals, Rams and 49ers. Beating a dead horse I know, but there were a lot of other teams with weak receivers and dinged up offensive lines that still managed to field a credible passing attack and put more than 12 points a game on the board. They'll be better this year.

I find two things from 2008 to be fluky:
1) that such a quality defense would get so few turnovers (turnovers are part-skill, part-luck), and
2) that Cooley scored only once. From his stats you can't argue that Cooley had a bad year or that JC could not find him.

To me, the law of averages will have to rectify both of these flukes...and 2009 is a good time for the law of averages to catch up!

Read through the Redskins chapter last night and, well, it didn't explain the projection very well.

The Redskins were given basically an even spread between being a 10-win team and a 6 win team, so this prediction really isn't saying that much.

The 11% chance of winning 11+ games does seem about half as much as it should be. In the article, Doug Farrar went at length to tell us how Haynesworth makes us a much better defense, and the offense should be better in the second year under Zorn, and then cites the competitiveness of the division as a reason to expect another average season, but we never really get a concrete reason that the projections don't have us as an improved team. I was disappointed in that.

One thing they said was that we didn't get unlucky with injuries last year, at least less more so in the first half of the season than the second, but their reasons for our two worst performances as a team coming in the last three weeks include, "golly gee, there was probably a reason there." So I think that is reflected in the projections.

So it comes down to this: if you think the last three games was a small sample aberration from our true team last year, they are probably under projecting us by at least a game and a half. If you think those games show legitimate problems with our offense and defense that were only mitigated by our offseason, then this is probably an 8-win team.

I'm doing an interview with them, so I'll have more to say later.

The really fascinating thing is here (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2009/introducing-dvoa-v60).

They did a DVOA update, and the Redskins more than doubled in efficiency from last year. Only the Jaguars benefited more from the new system. Mostly, that change is seen in our rushing offense, which then now have ranked sixth.

All in all, I see very little reason to believe that we aren't an improved team, and furthermore, very little reason to believe that DVOA wouldn't see it that way.

Yes. Without any changes to our team, you see-
Our first 7 opponents include several teams we should beat and we could be 6-2 by week 9 again.
We really have an easier schedule then last year (no Pitt/Balt and SD in Dec will be perfect weather/timing)
we play Dallas late December, and if they are losing they could very well implode between coaching and Romo/Kitna
we have one less preseason game,
and a slightly better positioned bye.

Changes to our team that should help also:
JC is as motivated as he could ever be
AH should improve our DLine and big play D's
ARE will not be returning punts (i really am sure of this, but no real way to prove it)
JZ will have a season under his belt
For every big play D Hall gives up, we ought to get 1-2 TO's that change a game.
Finally, last year's rookies all now have one year under their belt. (Yes a year can make a huge difference)

Finally,
as the other poster said, our Division rivals all have more transitional issues than us, and I believe Philly and the Giants D's both will see their D's soften slightly under the new coaches.

Nice post...a well reasoned positive outlook. The kicker IMO is whether Thomas or Kelly breakout. That will change everything on offense almost instantly. Personally I feel Devin is the better prospect for a breakout (this season). I really, really hope he and JC have developed chemistry. Wouldn't it be amazing to have an offense really fun to watch again!?

Yeah, and there's no reason they shouldn't have done better against the niners when absolutely nothing was on the line. I can understand needing an above average to dominant O line to be successful against the best defenses in the league, but there are no excuses against the likes of the Bengals, Rams and 49ers. Beating a dead horse I know, but there were a lot of other teams with weak receivers and dinged up offensive lines that still managed to field a credible passing attack and put more than 12 points a game on the board. They'll be better this year.

I think the explanation to this is simply having one of the worst, if not the worst, oline in the league over the long haul. It's not an easy pill to swallow but thinking about how that group was absolutely destroyed by Pitt, Baltimore, NY and Dallas during the 2nd half of the season then it's no surprise the oline never recovered...so even the Bengals, Rams the niners were a challenge.

It's interesting to see how focus on the state of the oline has waned this off-season within the franchise and fanbase. I want to believe we've done enough to avoid another collapse, but i can't agree w/ how our FO has handled the situation. We're literally one injury away from the line falling to pieces (Samuels) and if any two of the other starters went down the offense would grind to halt.

Yeah, and there's no reason they shouldn't have done better against the niners when absolutely nothing was on the line. I can understand needing an above average to dominant O line to be successful against the best defenses in the league, but there are no excuses against the likes of the Bengals, Rams and 49ers. Beating a dead horse I know, but there were a lot of other teams with weak receivers and dinged up offensive lines that still managed to field a credible passing attack and put more than 12 points a game on the board. They'll be better this year.

I agree